NEW YORK, Jan. 15, 2021 /PRNewswire/ Juan Monteverde, founder and managing partner at Monteverde & Associates PC, a national securities firm rated Top 50 in the 2018 and 2019
Emails indicate North Dakota s attorney general advocated for the U.S. Supreme Court to take up Texas lawsuit over the presidential election despite an expectation among some of his top officials that it wouldn t succeed.
The state s deputy solicitor general told Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem he thought the high court would deny the case in one sentence. A professor who has studied states support of the lawsuit in depth sees the attorney general s move as contradictory for North Dakota.
Stenehjem said the 17 states who signed onto a court document called an amicus brief in support of the lawsuit took no position on whether electoral fraud occurred, but we only say that if there was, thatâs an issue the Supreme Court should look at.
On January 12, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case of
Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski, which occurred in the context of religious speech on a college campus. The question at issue in the case is whether a plaintiff may proceed with a case when all that remains at issue is a claim for nominal damages. This case could have important ramifications for civil rights cases where plaintiffs have been subjected to an allegedly unconstitutional policy that is thereafter changed or abandoned by a defendant.
Background: University’s Freedom of Expression Policy Challenged
The student plaintiff in this case, Chike Uzuegbunam, distributed religious literature in an open, outdoor plaza on the campus of Georgia Gwinnett College (GGC). He was prohibited from that distribution and from subsequent attempts to speak and distribute literature under GGC’s “Freedom of Expression Policy” which limited expressive activity to certain areas of campus and required speakers to o
Lake Worth Beach resident David Brass wrote U.S. Sen. Rick Scott after his vote not to accept Pennsylvania’s certified Electoral College votes for President-elect Joe Biden.
“Senator Scott, your continued support of the attempt to undermine a free and fair election, especially after the actions of anarchists supported by POTUS earlier in the day, is mind boggling,” Brass wrote. “Shame on you.”
Scott sent back a signed reply explaining his vote, saying that he had listened to people complaining about the way the election was handled and that he “shared many of their concerns.”
It’s worth looking at his purported rationale and deconstructing it.